Ermco Erectors, Inc. v. Grand Iron Works, Inc.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Ermco Erectors, Inc. v. Grand Iron Works, Inc.

93 A.D.2d 878, 461 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17755

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedApril 25, 1983

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 93 A.D.2d 878 (Ermco Erectors, Inc. v. Grand Iron Works, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Ermco Erectors, Inc. v. Grand Iron Works, Inc., 93 A.D.2d 878, 461 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17755 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

— In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of contract, defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated August 26,1982, as failed to grant it summary judgment as to 10 of plaintiff’s 15 pleaded causes of action and failed to order an immediate trial on certain of its affirmative defenses. Plaintiff cross-appeals from so much of the same order as granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment insofar as it dismissed five of its pleaded causes of action. Order modified, on the law, by granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety. As so modified, order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements to defendant. Plaintiff’s entry into the settlement of February 6,1981 serves as an absolute bar to the instant action. Plaintiff’s conclusory allegations in support of its assertion of economic duress are not adequately supported by evidentiary facts (see Austin Instrument v Loral Corp., 29 NY2d 124; Muller Constr. Co. v New York Tel. Co., 50 AD2d 580, affd 40 NY2d 955). Damiani, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

— In an action to recover damages, inter alia, for breach of contract, defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Lerner, J.), dated August 26,1982, as failed to grant it summary judgment as to 10 of plaintiff’s 15 pleaded causes of action and failed to order an immediate trial on certain of its affirmative defenses. Plaintiff cross-appeals from so much of the same order as granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment insofar as it dismissed five of its pleaded causes of action. Order modified, on the law, by granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment and dismissing plaintiff’s complaint in its entirety. As so modified, order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements to defendant. Plaintiff’s entry into the settlement of February 6,1981 serves as an absolute bar to the instant action. Plaintiff’s conclusory allegations in support of its assertion of economic duress are not adequately supported by evidentiary facts (see Austin Instrument v Loral Corp., 29 NY2d 124; Muller Constr. Co. v New York Tel. Co., 50 AD2d 580, affd 40 NY2d 955). Damiani, J. P., Thompson, O’Connor and Niehoff, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

93 A.D.2d 878, 461 N.Y.S.2d 423, 1983 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 17755, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ermco-erectors-inc-v-grand-iron-works-inc-nyappdiv-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack